Architect Tias Camilleri De Marco recently argued that it was time to remove the ban on the use of aluminium on facades. He also asked an interesting question: “Of all our architects, cannot we trust a single one to use bronze aluminium in a meaningful manner?”

Let us remind ourselves how we got to this stage.

Decades ago, aluminium was a far cheaper option than wood for apertures and balconies. But it did not take long for “cringe-worthy and kitsch” fixtures to crop up everywhere. They were never seen as a designer option; quite the contrary.

Wooden balconies, introduced in Malta in the 18th century, were being replaced by metal boxes. Rightly so, people started complaining about when the elegant balconies started disappearing. Malta did not only ban aluminium; the Planning Authority came up with numerous schemes to help cover the cost of balconies restoration. And it was not the only scheme: another one was launched to help with restoration of entire facades in certain towns. That was one of the finest schemes we’ve seen.

There is a lot to be said about the importance of respecting and retaining our built heritage, not just because balconies look great on tourism marketing material but because they – and traditional streetscapes – represent our cultural heritage, even as testament to our way of life in the past.

However, it would be sad if we felt that only the aesthetically pleasing solution was to stick to the past. Architecture is not only about the past but about the future, giving us numerous iconic buildings around the world that become synonymous with towns and cities. This is why Din l-Art Ħelwa, Kamra tal-Periti and the Planning Authority organise architectural awards, which are meant to pay homage to best practice, for the old as well as for the new and cutting edge.

This is not just about [architects’] lack of imagination or aesthetic flair, but because at the end of the day, their clients demand more for less… and the quicker the better

Where would the world be without the Bilbao Museum, the ‘Gherkin’ and ‘Shard’ in London, the Pompidou Centre and Louvre pyramid in Paris? Some were despised when they first took shape but now have become part of the imagery of the cities they grace.

In Malta, Renzo Piano’s parliament has already become our own icon, as Zaha Hadid’s Mercury Tower in Paceville will eventually become.

Camilleri De Marco is arguing that architects should be trusted to come up with something aesthetically pleasing, and that the restrictions “hinder creativity”.

That the restrictions hinder creativity is certain; that architects can be trusted to come up with something aesthetic is not.

All you need to do is take a quick look around to realise that the building frenzy of the past 20 years has not done Malta any favours. And this is not just about building heights but about the lack of imagination or aesthetic flair, the drive to the bottom of standards. These are often not because the architects are not capable of better but because at the end of the day, their clients demand more for less… and the quicker the better.

The issue is not the great majority of architects but the rogue ones that are in cahoots with the rogue developers who are giving planning, development and construction a bad name.

In the absence of any official aesthetic guidelines, which the Kamra tal-Periti has long been asking for, perhaps lifting the ban on aluminium could unleash beautiful designs.

Architects need to be given the liberty they deserve.